Is it permissible to fast the six days of Shawwal before making up for the missed fasts of Ramadan?
● If a person missed fasts due to a valid excuse, they may fast the six days of Shawwal before making up for Ramadan fasts, because qada (makeup fasts) in this case can be delayed, while the six days of Shawwal must be observed within Shawwal.
● However, if a person missed fasts without a valid excuse, they must make up for the missed fasts immediately after Eid, before fasting the six days of Shawwal. If they fast the six days first, it is valid, but they must still make up for the missed Ramadan fasts afterward.
It is also permissible to combine the intention of qada (makeup fasts) and the six days of Shawwal in one fast. However, it is better to fast them separately, as this increases the reward and avoids scholarly disagreement regarding combining intentions.
I have a date farm, and the dates come in different categories, and within each category there are different sizes. How is zakāh paid on the yield?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master, the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
If the yield reaches the niṣāb (the minimum threshold for zakāh to become obligatory) — which is five awsuq (plural of wasq), equivalent to (611) kg — then zakāh becomes obligatory upon it, at a rate of one-tenth ('ushr) if irrigated by rainwater (i.e., naturally, without the use of machinery), or one-twentieth (half of the 'ushr) if irrigated using machinery/equipment.
If the yield of dates consists of different varieties, then zakāh should be paid from each variety according to its respective proportion. If this proves difficult, it is permissible to pay from a medium-quality variety [representative of the average].
It is stated in Ḥāshiyatā Qulyūbī wa ‘Umayrah (Vol.2/P.22): "Different varieties are combined together [for the purpose of calculating the niṣāb] — such as the various types of dates, the various types of raisins, and so on — and zakāh is paid from each type according to its respective proportion. However, if this becomes difficult due to the large number of varieties and the small quantity of each individual type, then zakāh should be paid from a medium-quality variety among them — neither the best nor the worst — out of consideration for both sides [the giver and the poor recipient]. If one goes to the trouble of paying from each variety according to its proportion, this is also permissible." And Allah, the Exalted, knows best.
What is the ruling on purchasing sacrificial animals and authorizing their slaughter via telephone?
Praise be to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our Master, the Messenger of Allah.
It is preferable for the one offering a sacrifice (udhiyah) to slaughter the animal himself, in adherence to the Sunnah, or to be present at the slaughter if possible.
It is valid to authorize a butcher to purchase a sacrificial animal on his behalf and slaughter it, regardless of whether the animal is owned by the butcher or the butcher is acting as an agent in its sale—according to the Hanbali school—provided that the butcher specifically designates and purchases the animal for the person offering the sacrifice before slaughtering it. And Allah Almighty knows best.
Is the Saying "Whatever is Taken by the Sword of Shyness is Forbidden" an Authentic Ḥadīth?
All praise is due to Allah, and peace and blessings be upon our master the Messenger of Allah ﷺ.
The saying "Whatever is taken by the sword of shyness is forbidden" is not an authentic ḥadīth, though its underlying meaning is sound. The established sharʿī principle is that a Muslim's wealth is not lawful for anyone to take except with his wholehearted consent, as Allah the Almighty says {what means}: "O you who have believed, do not consume one another's wealth unjustly, but only [in lawful] business by mutual consent." [Al-Nisā/ 29] And the Messenger of Allah ﷺ said: "Listen to me and you will live well: do not wrong others, do not wrong others, do not wrong others. Indeed, a man's wealth is not lawful except with his full, willing consent." (Reported by Aḥmad in his Musnad.) Whatever is taken through the pressure of shyness or social embarrassment runs directly counter to genuine, wholehearted consent.
The jurists have explicitly stated that whatever is taken by means of the "sword of shyness" carries the same ruling as that which is taken by coercion — it must be returned to its rightful owner.
Ibn Ḥajar al-Haytamī, may Allah have mercy upon him, states in al-Fatāwā al-Kubrā (Vol.3/P.30): "Do you not see the reported scholarly consensus that whoever has something taken from him purely out of shyness, without his genuine consent, does not pass ownership of it to the one who took it? They reasoned that this constitutes a form of coercion through the 'sword of shyness,' comparable to coercion at the point of an actual sword. Indeed, many people would rather submit to the literal sword and endure the pain of its wound than submit to this first kind of coercion, out of fear for their dignity and standing — which people of sound judgment hold dear and guard most fiercely." And Allah the Almighty knows best.
